An accepted principle for evaluating a system or ideology is to differentiate between its declared principles, on one hand, and the actual practice of the people who claim to stand for or represent it, on the other. For example, let us consider that you want to evaluate the role of the United Nations which was formed in 1945. Every student of international politics knows that in order to understand the role of the UN, he/she has to study the Charter of the UN. It is this Charter which will serve as the authentic source of reference for understanding the UN. The student will not form his/her opinion about the UN by seeing the practices of the 193 member states of the UN. The value of the UN can be judged by its ideology rather than the practices of its member countries.
To understand Islam, one needs to study the Quran and Sunnah, rather than the actual behaviour of the people who claim to be its followers.
So, too, is the case with Islam. To understand what Islam really is, you need to study the authentic texts which contain its principles. These are the Quran and Sunnah (practice of the Prophet of Islam). There are more than one billion people in the world who claim to be Muslims. To understand Islam, one needs to study the Quran and Sunnah, rather than the actual behaviour of these people who claim to be its followers. The right method of studying Islam is to differentiate between Islam, on one hand, and Muslims, on the other. Muslims have to be judged in the light of Islamic teachings, and not vice versa.
The central Islamic teaching is the discovery of God and the understanding of God's creation plan for mankind. Prophets were sent by God with the mission to make man aware of this creation plan. The Quran clearly tells us that the mission of the Prophet is peaceful dissemination of the divine message.
[O Prophet] remind them: your task is only to remind, you are not a master over them. (THE QURAN 88:21)
Following in the footsteps of the Prophet, the primary duty of believers is to continue this work of peacefully conveying the divine message to mankind. It should be clearly understood that there is no Quranic verse that directs Muslims to establish ‘Islamic rule’. This kind of commandment is alien to the Quranic scheme of things. Political rule is a relative part of Islam, whereas the peaceful dissemination of the divine message is an essential part of Islam. A relevant social teaching of Islam is reflected in this Quranic verse: As-sulh khair (THE QURAN 4:128). That is, “Reconciliation is the best.” According to this verse, Muslims must try to establish peaceful relations with others. They are not commanded to impose any system on others. If they try to impose any system, it would lead to conflict, and everything would be jeopardized.
As far as the socio-political system is concerned, there is no ideal model for it in Islam. It depends on the actual situation prevailing in any given period. The socio-political system emerges from within a given society, rather than being imposed from outside. Muslims must reconcile with such a system. They must accept the principle of status quo in this matter. They have been instructed not to precipitate problems. It is in the best interests of Muslims to establish peace between people, because peace leads to normalcy, and normalcy helps in availing opportunities for the real mission of Islam, which is the mission of inviting people onto God’s path.
The central Islamic teaching is the discovery of God and the understanding of God's creation plan for mankind.
Islam does not permit Muslims to engage in war against anyone. Under normal circumstances, Muslims are exhorted to engage in peaceful communication of God’s message and to abstain from a confrontational approach in all matters. The only exception to this is in the face of aggression by others. The Quran clearly mentions that there should be no war unless one is faced with aggression from another party. This means that in Islam there is only one legitimate form of war, and that is defensive war. Muslims have not been commanded to initiate war. Nor are they allowed to engage in wars of aggression. However, if another party begins war, then Muslims can engage in self-defence.
The Quran says:
And fight in God’s cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression—for surely, God does not love aggressors. (THE QURAN 2:190)
This verse clearly states that Islam allows only defensive war. Aggressive war is not permitted in Islam. No exception whatsoever is permissible in this regard. The Quran does contain some verses that refer to war. These pertain to those situations when Muslims were at war. One such verse is:
Fight those from among the People of the Book who believe neither in God, nor in the Last Day, nor hold as unlawful what God and His Messenger have declared to be unlawful, nor follow the true religion, until they pay the tax willingly and agree to submit. (THE QURAN 9:29)
In Islam there is only one legitimate form of war, and that is defensive war.
It is important to note that this verse does not say that Muslims should wage war with “so and so”. It only means that Muslims should fight in defence, against those who have waged war against them. This verse speaks of war against attackers: it is the only real reason to engage in war against them. Their being non-believers is not the reason to engage in war against them. The mention of non-believers here is not to indicate that their being non-believers is the reason for war. Rather, it is only to specify who they were. The reason for war was not that they were non-believers, but, rather, that they were attackers. This verse should, therefore, be understood in the light of the verse quoted earlier. i.e. (THE QURAN 2:190).
Another point to bear in mind is that the prophetic period of the Prophet of Islam lasted for twenty-three years. More than half this period was spent in Makkah. There were non-believers in Makkah then, but no verse was revealed to the Prophet commanding him to wage war against them. Had the justification to wage war with people been their being non-believers, the command for war would have been given earlier, when the Prophet was in Makkah itself. But a verse of this kind was revealed only after the Prophet’s migration to Medina. This was because at that time, the opponents of Islam realized that Islam was flourishing on account of having found a strong base in Medina. It was then that they took to violent aggression. In the Makkan period, Muslims were merely considered a different religious sect by their opponents, but in the Medinan period they were taken as a grave threat. That is why in the Makkan period, the opponents of Islam were only engaged in opposition, but when the Prophet migrated to Medina, these opponents launched armed military aggression against them. It was at this point in time that the following verse was revealed:
Permission to fight is given to those who are attacked, because they have been oppressed. (THE QURAN 22:39)
In this verse, the word “oppression” (zulm) is meant in the sense of aggression. As is known, during the thirteen-year period of the Prophet’s life as a prophet in Makkah, the opponents of Islam continuously subjected the Muslims to persecution. However, in this period, no commandment for war was revealed. Such a command was revealed only after the Prophet migrated to Medina, when the opponents of Islam embarked on military aggression against the Muslims. Therefore, in this verse “oppression” implies aggression, and not non-aggressive oppression.
The Quran clearly mentions that there should be no war unless one is faced with aggression from another party.
A related issue that needs clarification is that of jizyah or tribute. It must be noted that jizyah is not a permanent command of Islam. Instead, it was a temporary order. At that time it was common practice among governments to impose a levy like the jizyah as a temporary punitive tax on those who had waged an unprovoked war. This same practice was applied to the contemporary opponents of the Prophet. Jizyah was therefore a temporary tax imposed on those opponents of the Prophet who were his contemporaries. The Muslim rulers who tried to continue this practice of jizyah after the Prophet were not right. They have misinterpreted this verse of the Quran. (THE QURAN 9:29). Jizyah is not at all applicable in the present age.
Yet another issue that needs clarification in this discussion about war and peace in Islam is a Hadith from al-Bukhari, which is translated as: “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘La ilaha illallah’ (‘There is no god but God’), and whoever said ‘No god other than Allah’ will save his property and his life from me.”
In this Hadith, 'al-nas', or ‘people’ refers to the people of Makkah. So, this Hadith must be interpreted only in the light of the actual conduct of the Prophet of Islam towards the people of Makkah. It is on record that at the time when the Prophet victoriously entered Makkah in 630 CE, most of the Makkans were non-believers. They were brought before the Prophet while he was in the premises of the Kabah. The Prophet did not offer them these two choices: ‘Convert to Islam or you shall be put to death.’ On the contrary, he said to these Makkans: “Iz-habu faantum al-tulaqa” (Ibn Hisham). That is: ‘Go, you all are free.’ Although these people embraced the faith of Islam later on, their acceptance of Islam was completely by choice. It was not a matter of forced conversion. In the above Hadith, the words, “Till they say: ‘La ilaha illallah’” symbolically implies surrender, or the ending of war.
Following in the footsteps of the Prophet, the primary duty of the believers is to continue the work of peacefully conveying the divine message to mankind.
After the death of the Prophet, there were some wars between the Companions of the Prophet and the two adjacent empires—the Byzantine Empire and the Sassanid Empire. But, these wars were started as defensive wars by the Companions, because both these empires had exhibited clear aggression by killing the ambassador of the Muslim state and sending their armies at the borders of the territory of Arabia. This led to initiation of war by the two empires.
20th century Muslim leaders wanted to revive the Muslim ummah. However, their starting-point was wrong. They sought the revival of Muslim history of the later period, when Muslims had established empires. The right beginning for these leaders would have been to seek to revive the original method of the Prophet of Islam, which was communication of the message of God to mankind. But Muslim leaders did not begin their endeavours from this juncture. This was clearly an erroneous judgement on their part, and it led to widespread problems. It exhorted some Muslims to take to violence as a means to pursue their goals, resulting in the enormous tragedies that are unfolding all around us now.
